Thursday, September 1, 2011

Porn Panic 2011, The Series: Here Come The Big Dawgs: Manwin, Brazzers' Parent Company, Busts Out The Whupping Stick Against AHF's Accusations

And now...the Big Dawgs move in.

Here's the statement just released by Manwin, the parent company of Brazzers, in response to the charges flinged at them by Michael Weinstein and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, concerning the latest HIV porn scare, where a male performer has been alleged to have tested positive for HIV. AHF had claimed that the alleged infected performer had exposed up to 13 other performers to the virus while shooting for Brazzers, and called for federal, state, and local sanctions against the company as a "sanitary nusiance". (Both XBiz and AVN have the statement posted at their blogs.)

LUXEMBOURG—Manwin and some of its online properties have recently been falsely accused by AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) as well as by other organizations in relation to possible HIV exposure of an adult industry performer.

The AHF statement is an unacceptable attempt to undermine the reputation of our producers through the publication of false information.

Our attorneys have sent the AHF a formal request demanding an immediate retraction.

Manwin and its affiliated producers wish to reiterate that we take industry performers’ health and safety very seriously and as such, we have at all times operated our business in strict compliance with all applicable state and federal laws. Consequently, all of our adult online properties and their producers have accurately and meticulously followed best and standard industry practices when it comes to testing our performers.

Manwin and its producers have never attempted to hide any information or mislead anyone concerning the nature of the incident. We have acted as diligently as possible in a transparent manner in order to avoid and to mitigate any potential damages of any nature for our performers specifically and for the industry as a whole in accordance with the advice of our counsel.

More specifically, at no time did “Patient A” perform or provide any services for any of our producers after any test results were disclosed reflecting even the possibility of HIV exposure or infection. This fact is well documented and proves that the industry testing process precisely works as it should.

In addition, “Performer A” has never worked for Brazzers.com. The performer in question has performed for a separate website known as Mofos.com.

To this extent, statements to the contrary are inaccurate and possibly defamatory. We are currently waiting for a final and clear result on whether or not “Patient A” has tested positive for HIV. This process and its corresponding privacy implications means that we cannot comment further until the full results have been legally transmitted and disclosed.

Until then, we cannot and will not tolerate any further malicious, unverified, inaccurate or misleading statements published by anyone. In addition, we will not further comment on the sanitary nuisance health complaint with the Florida Department of Health and a similar letter of complaint with federal OSHA officials until we have had the opportunity to review the content of these documents and their implications.
 Ahhh....zone defense. Nothing like 6-figure lawyers to cut through bullshit, ehhh??



3 comments:

  1. Please note the use of the word "defamatory" in the Brazers statement.

    That's lawyer talk for "you're an RCH away from getting sued off the face of the earth."

    Could it be that this time Weinstein will end up at the defendants' table?

    Let's see how the next few days play out. If it turns out that there is no new infection, or that it did not involve anyone connected with Brazzers, look for AHF to have a rough day in court.

    About time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And in the midst of all this, here's a juicy item from AVN regarding what the standards are like in mainstream entertainment as opposed to porn:

    http://business.avn.com/articles/legal/Porn-Takes-Better-Care-of-Its-Stars-Than-MTV-Who-Knew-445517.html

    If you want to read it before Anthony can make it a live link, just paste it into your browser.

    So, Mr. Weinstein, going after MTV next? Looking at AHF's list of celeb donors, somehow I doubt it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. To those not involved in film or video production (mainstream OR adult), allow me the honor of explaining the term Ernest referenced, "RCH":

    There exists an informal system of increments on set, particularly vis-a-vis camera and lighting.

    To tell someone to make a minor adjustment, you suggest a change of one CH -- or, one "cunt hair" -- this way or that.

    An even finer unit of adjustment would be an RCH -- or, a "red cunt hair."

    Should we get to the subject of advertising and commercial adverts, remind me to explain what "two c's in a k" means. LOL

    ReplyDelete